A cracker (or hacker depending on how you define the terms)
somehow got into the CD Universe database files and stole
hundreds of credit card numbers. After a $100,000 blackmail
attempt failed, the cracker posted the numbers to the Web
for all to see. The cracker, believed to be out of Europe,
is still at large. So if you've made a purchase at CD
Universe, you may want to keep an eye on your next few
credit card bills.

U.S. Attorney General Janet Reno wants to start LawNet, a
round-the-clock watch on cyber crime through the Internet.
From what I understand, she'll set up networks of people who
surf stupidly in order to get scammed. Once scammed, they
turn on the scammer and bring down the law. You have to
admit - that's a pretty cool job.

A couple new Y2K burps popped up. Software from CyberCash
was never updated so many Visa and MasterCard customers were
billed twice for items purchased near the start of 2000. A
group of cash registers in Greece are showing 1900 on their
receipts. Godiva Chocolate Company had a problem with their
cash registers too. They stopped working. Al Gore's Web site
posted their dates through JavaScript so the date displayed
the year as 19100. Doppler weather systems in Chicago were
shut down for a short time.

Also, for those who believe that Y2K was all a big hoax, the
government set up three of their non-compliant machines to
run through 2000. Each machine crashed and could not be
restarted. Gosh.

Now onto today's topic...

AOL and Time Warner have merged into a huge media monster.
The deal, valued at $160+ billion in stock, put the number
one Internet provider and the number one entertainment
company in the same boat. Do you know what they're going to
call the new company? AOL Time Warner. Clever, huh? You'd
think with all that money they could have come up with a
better name.

From everything I've read about the merger, it sounds like
the more things change the more they stay the same. I don't
know that I find this merger such a great idea. As I see it,
now AOL has access to all of Time Warner's entertainment
media including People Magazine, Time, and Sports Illustrated,
Warner Brother's movies, CNN's content among others. Plus
AOL can now use miles of cable lines to deliver content at
"like-television" quality. Of course then there's AOL's
gaining access to 13 million cable subscribers thanks to
Time Warner.

On the other side of the coin, Time Warner has access to a
huge Internet audience for advertising, sales, and delivery
of content. Plus, the merger literally yanks Time Warner
into the 21st century. They basically bought an in-place
delivery system.

For both of the companies, it validates the Internet as a
legitimate business and delivery system. Those who might
have been wary of the Internet can now look to the merger
and think, "maybe the Internet is for real".

The question is...is this giving anyone anything new? Does
the merger benefit anyone other than the stockholders and
those involved in AOL and Time Warner? One person I asked
responded "Of course not. They did the merger to get control
of a larger audience. Period"

I don't know that that's far off. If I'm missing the benefit
to the consumer, then I'm sure you'll let me know, but let's
look at what I hear being touted as the benefits.

Maybe, thanks to the merger, I can get TV quality movies and
TV shows on my computer. But can't I do that now? I'd use my
TV for it. Is it a benefit that I can now use my computer?
I guess a benefit would be that I could have the items when
I want them, but would the download time or streaming concerns
make it better than going to the video store or waiting until
the show airs? (I doubt you'll be able to see shows over your
computer before they air.)

I saw that the merger would allow you to purchase any and
all merchandise from the Warner Brothers catalogue. Can't I
do that now? Is the fact that I can do it all from one
central location a benefit?

On the morning after the merger, the early shows were going
on and on about how big the merger was while talking to
expert after expert. I guess I'm missing something since
every time someone would explain the benefits of the
get-together, I shrugged because I didn't see anything
improving the life of the guy sitting at a terminal.

What did grab my attention was a small, what's known as
"kicker", story, at the tail end of the newscast. The anchor
stated that stocks of Viacom, Disney, and other media giants
went up as much as ten percent because of the belief that it
was only a matter of time before they would be bought by an
Internet giant, creating some competition for AOL Time Warner.

Now I'm concerned.

Have you ever heard of the concept of "hegemony"? Hegemony,
without getting into too much theory, is a Marxist concept
that states that the ruling ideas of the upper class will
become the ruling ideas of the lower class. Now, I'm not a
Marxist, before you ask, but I do think the theory, when
applied to the media, shows cause for concern.

Let's say there are two newspapers in a city. Two separate
companies own each paper. That makes two companies competing
against one another. Two local owners making decisions in a
local situation. Now let's say one paper goes under
financially, leaving the other paper as the only game in
town. That paper alone now has the ability to say how the
newspaper business, in that town, will run. Now let's go
farther. A national newspaper-publishing company buys up
that local newspaper. The local newspaper is now one of 500
papers across the country run by that one national company.

See what happened? The decision making process went from
many smaller papers across the country making individual
decisions for their local area to one national company
making decisions for all those newspapers. Now we have a
concept of hegemony. One small group exerting power over
the masses.

Please understand I'm painting with a broad brush here.
Hegemony is a theory, not a provable fact, but can you see
where I think this is going? If all these mergers between
Internet and media giants occur, then the idea-makers at the
top become smaller and smaller, making decisions for a larger
and larger number of people who use the service.

And...if the mergers occur then it is only a matter of time
before two huge mergers merge to create yet a larger
multi-media conglomerate. Some might think that such a
massive merger would never go though. Well...AOL and Time
Warner went through and I defy you to pick two larger
companies, in this industry, to merge.

So let's say I'm right. Five years from now, we have a small
number of people making the decisions about content, and
merchandise, and fees for Internet users and Internet
commerce. Instead of 100 choices, you have 5. Oh sure, you
can still go to many different stores, but each is owned by
the same company and each is run pretty much the same way.
The landscape of the Internet will be shaped by a small
group of people. Maybe you'll be very happy with what comes
out, maybe you won't.

If you aren't happy, what will you do? To whom will you
complain? Will your voice make a difference?

Of course there will always be a portion of the Internet that
will be created by individuals. Those who do not like what
they see will always have a section of the Web to visit, but
what will be there? How long will a Web site be successful
on its own before one of the large companies comes along and
snaps it up? And once they snap it up, will the site be run
the same way it did or will it be molded a bit to conform to
what the owners of the conglomerate feel looks best?

It will be interesting to see how the companies involved in
the merger handle their customers. Policy will be set at the
top and filtered down though the system. Few to many. It
will certainly be good to AOL Time Warner. Will it be good
for the Internet?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

That's that. School will have started at my University by
the time you're reading this. This semester I'm again going
on line with my HTML course. The class is full and I'm ready
to go. I wonder if I should offer the class format on line?
Hmmmm.....

Joe Burns, Ph.D.

And Remember: What does Charlotte Bartholdi's face look like?
What do Jeanne-Emilie's arms and body look like? Just like
the Statue of Liberty. Those two people were the mother and
girlfriend, respectively, of the statue's designer Fredric
Auguste Bartholdi.